1 Language and cognitive science Linguistics lecture #1 October 26, 2006

2 Overview Linguistics and cognitive science Linguistic cognition The cognition of linguists

3 Linguistics and cognitive science Linguistics is the scientific study of language, not of the mind in general MIND vision etc LANGUAGE history etc linguistic cognition

4 Why is linguistics important to cognitive science? Language is cool Language is easy to study

5 Language is cool Almost all humans have language (Not little babies, not some brain-damaged people) - Every culture on earth, even isolated islands - Geniuses, stupid people - Hearing people, deaf people - People can’t stop talking, can’t stop understanding

6 Language is cool Language lets you read other people’s minds - Thought can be translated into physical form - Physical forms can be translated into thought

7 Language is cool Language gives you power - You can boss people around - You can tell somebody how to make something - You can talk to yourself and write things down when you’re trying to figure out something - Having a natural language helps you invent artificial language tools (logic, math, computer programs, etc)

8 Language is cool Babies are smarter than adults and computers - Babies begin to master language long before going to school - Adults suffer a lot learning a new language - Computers are still very stupid at using language, and even stupider at learning it

9 Language is cool Language makes us special - Other animals are probably conscious - Other animals have vision - Other animals walk on two legs, make tools, etc - No other animal has human-style language: words + rules

10 Language is easy to study Language is “out there” in the world - Other aspects of the mind seem “hidden” (memories, consciousness) - Language can be heard and seen - Observable language patterns seem to correspond with actual mental patterns

11 Language is easy to study Linguistics fits well with philosophical functionalism - Key metaphor: The brain is a computer, the mind is a program (or system of programs) - The math-like language of computers is inspired by natural human language, so natural language seems easy to analyze within this metaphor

12 Linguistic cognition The mind operates by information processing - One kind of information is translated into another kind of information within the mind - Information can also be transduced into or out of physical forms

13 Linguistic information processing Thoughts are translated into sentence syntax ( 句法 ) Syntactic structures are filled in with words Word structure is morphology ( 構詞 ) Sentences and words are prepared for transduction into physical forms by phonology ( 音韻 )

14 A key concept: GRAMMAR Syntax, morphology, and phonology are all part of grammar ( 語法 ) Linguists actually study grammar, not really language itself

15 Linguistic structure One of the first to emphasize that grammar can open a window into the mind was American linguist Noam Chomsky His 1957 book Syntactic Structures gave a “computer-like” theory of syntax His 1959 review of Skinner’s linguistic theories helped to kill Behaviorism Still very active and influential today

16 Noam Chomsky 1960sToday

17 Generative grammar Chomsky invented it, and it’s still the dominant concept in linguistics today - A grammar is generative if it can “generate” a language in an abstract sense, that is, if it can describe a language explicitly and completely. - Chomsky’s “generative” does NOT mean “generate speech” when actually using language!

18 Grammar and language Languages are infinite, grammars are finite Language: 他來了。 他說他來了。 他說他說他來了。 他說他說他說他來了。 …… Grammar: 他說 + sentence = sentence

19 Unconscious knowledge Since the mind/brain is finite, “knowing a language” is really “knowing a grammar” But this is mostly unconscious knowledge: you don’t know what you know - For example, if you know Southern Min ( 閩南 ), how do you say these words? 「詩文」「時間」「寺」

20 Unconscious knowledge 詩詩文 時時間 死死人 四四點 寺寺僧 色色彩 熟熟茶

21 Knowing vs. using Grammar is knowledge, not language use (“I know English” vs. 「我會說英文」 ) Grammar = linguistic competence Language use = linguistic performance Language:... 他說他說他收他說他來了 … Grammar: 他收 + sentence = sentence??!! No! Speech errors are performance, not competence

22 Competence vs. performance (1) Those two little mice were very frightened. (2) Those two little mice [the cat chased] were very frightened. (3) Those two little mice [the cat [I hate] chased] were very frightened. (4) The mouse [the cat [the dog bit] chased] ran. Sentence (4) must be grammatical, but it is hard to process (performance problems)

23 Linguistic universals If human grammar is in the mind, and human minds are all identically “human”, we expect linguistic universals: aspects of grammar shared by all languages Chomsky’s Martian would think that all human languages are the same

24 Linguistic universals Some universals are obvious: Syntax always distinguishes nouns and verbs Phonology always uses syllables ( 音節 ) Others are less obvious: Some word orders are “more popular” than others: boy eat apple boy apple eat eat boy apple eat apple boy apple boy eat apple eat boy  

25 Linguistic universals Chinese and English are unrelated languages with many differences Yet they also share many similarities: - Both have nouns, verbs, etc - They share sounds, including weird ones like [l] - Word order is really not extremely different - Order inside words too: bookstore = 書店 - Meanings often match: “should” = 「應該」

26 Linguistic universals Even sign languages ( 手語 ) are not weird Every sign language has its own grammar (e.g. American Sign Language, Taiwan Sign Language, etc) - Many, many different words - Syntax and morphology - Even phonology: knowledge of linguistic transduction (patterns in physical forms)

27 The cognition of linguists Linguistics belongs in cognitive science, but are linguists scientists? Two answers…. Yes: They try to find general laws governing observed patterns No: They ignore causal relationships (as noted by psychologist George Miller): for them, “explanation” = simple description

28 Formalism Chomsky, like most linguists, believes in linguistic formalism: linguistic theories should refer only to the form of language Language: 「買馬」 sounds like 「埋馬」 Formal analysis:ˇ + ˇ  ˊ + ˇ Not formal: “ˇˇ is too hard to say, so you have to change it to ˊ ˇ”

29 Advantages of formalism Theories are more precise and explicit Formalism often seems to describe the way the mind really works (6) Colorless green ideas sleep furiously (Chomsky 1957) Sentence (6) has no meaning, and you would never use it in real life, but it still seems grammatical (it fits with English competence)

30 Functionalism However, other linguists believe in linguistic functionalism: the form of language may be explained by language use and non-linguistic cognition OK: 我從圖書館走到宿舍 Bad: 我到宿舍走從圖書館 - Here, word order matches “real” order (Tai 1985)

31 Where do universals come from? Formalist answer: Innate linguistic knowledge: basic concepts like “syllable” are in your DNA. Functionalist answer: Universal needs (e.g. communication)

32 Summary Linguistics belongs in cognitive science, but it may be “less scientific” than psychology Grammar = knowledge of language = linguistic competence (  performance) Generative grammar = 100% explicit Grammars have universal properties Linguistic formalism vs. linguistic functionalism: are both necessary?